slack_set_status

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing the required OAuth scope (users.profile:write), that the status is visible to everyone in the workspace, and what clearing/expiry semantics do to existing state. The annotations already cover idempotency and non-destructiveness, so this added context is the right kind of value for a 4.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the action and API method, then parameter notes in short clauses; no filler. The parenthetical scope note interrupts slightly but still earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the mutation's safety profile is covered by annotations. But for a five-parameter tool, the unexplained workspace and allow_promise parameters leave a real gap an agent may stumble on in multi-workspace setups.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does explain text (empty clears it, style gate applies), emoji (format like palm_tree), and expires_in_minutes (0 = until changed). However, the required workspace parameter and allow_promise are never explained, leaving two of five parameters opaque.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Set the user's Slack status") plus the underlying API method (users.profile.set), so the action is unambiguous. No sibling tool sets a status, so it is clearly distinguished from the listing/search/read siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives useful operational rules ("Empty text and emoji clear it", "expires_in_minutes: 0 keeps it until changed") but never states when an agent should set status versus, say, sending a message or reacting. There are no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.